Huh? AppleTalk was, according to the headline, discontinued in 2009 if that’s the useless feature you mean. It wasn’t useless before that, but eventually TCP/IP overtook it and it was no longer practical to run two networking stacks side by side. It is very similar to Microsoft’s extensive use of IPX/SPX up through Windows XP (IIRC XP was the last to include it).
Apple certainly has its flaws, including a bug I reported many years ago in Photos that makes it useless to me, but them discontinuing an aging network protocol nearly 25 years ago seems like a weird thing for you to be upset about, so maybe I misunderstood your post.
Early Episode One spoiler discussionWhen they opened the series and said soldiers up to age 24, and high school seniors were being called into active duty… I was intrigued, thought there was some age based reason only young people could effectively fight the Spheres. Like maybe the brain patterns of older adults were too suspectable to mind control, or something. But no… just… Need boots on the ground, so instead of using the military 24-40 and reservists 24-40… we will activate the highshoolers first… I realize this was all plot convenience to get a high school drama in a sci-fi war, but come on…
We need to get a drill instructor (is Angry Cops available) to review all the weapons discipline in the film… there was so much flagging it might as well have been the vexillological society.
The one scene early on where they are balancing a pebble on the end of the rifle while dry firing to prove they can aim and shoot steady, ok… but they are doing it in a circle… ok… but everyone is facing inwards… so every single firing position is dry firing pointing at friendlies…
One of the smallest suspension of disbelief in the film… but it irked me.
End of Series topicWhy did everyone have to die by the hands of the psychotic kid? I feel like there was a allegory for not taking the college tests to seriously in there, but that whole mental breakdown happed so fast, it felt forced
PrisonersWas I the only one shouting at the screen “JUST SHOOT THEM”, the whole hostage scenario could have been ended so quickly… 7 people with guns against 1 guy with a gun pointed at the ground…
Realistically, they probably got that number from 23andMe or similar.
Mine is 2.6% for Indigenous American, which is well within margin of error of what I heard from my family. (Note that those tests actually have very wide error bars anyway)
In the US, it depends on the tribe and they decide how much you need. Some are stricter than others. Canada and the US have been competing for worst treatment of first nations for a long time.
It’s handled by individual tribal governments. Some are very strict about who they let in, others are much more liberal about it. Basically it isn’t our federal government that makes that determination.
Just below you somebody posted that Barker was of 1/8 Native heritage.
Yet he grew up on a reservation, and even strict tribal elders should (and probably did) take into consideration Barker’s positive accomplishments for society in general, such as his campaign of awareness to spay/neuter pets to help keep the population under control humanely, and he was never afraid of using his microphone and airtime to remind his large audience every day, for decades.
What I’m saying is, even if 1/8 wasn’t technically enough, he could have made it in just like accomplished artists often receive honorary PhDs from prestigious Universities, even when they did not have (or finish) their formal education when younger.
57% of which tribe? With more than half, I would expect you to have a fairly strong upbringing in the tribe with various customs and your parents likely know how to get you enrolled.
Not always that simple. My father has tried for years but gets stonewalled because of who his father was, my grandfather was disowned for marrying a white woman rather than leave her a single mother. In the end I think being cut off like that is what killed my grandfather really.
Some tribes have been in legal battles over the past few decades because they’re trying to disenroll people no matter how “native” they are. IIRC at least one tribe was limiting membership to only the descendants of the families that signed a specific treaty and then only if they had the paperwork to back it up. Which, if you know anything about the history of natives in this country, is really fucked up to require.
Not the one I remember but here’s an example of a tribe disenrolling people regardless of their “blood quantum”:
My dad barely knew how to run things in windows 3.1 but he still regrets the day he installed windows 95 because it was all downhill from there when it came to him knowing what was going on.
This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move.
Seriously though, this is the first properly good UI for a desktop computer. Mac OS (or I guess Macintosh OS at the time) was okay, but reliant on the global menu and weird drop-downs. Windows kept everything self-contained. Even multi-window programs tended to use the “multiple document interface,” i.e., windows inside windows. Tabs weren’t really a thing yet.
It also crashed if you looked at it funny and had the antivirus capabilities of warm cheese. But there’s damn good reasons Windows 7 was the same experience, extended, rather than replaced. It’s more-or-less what I style Linux to look like. And in light of that I’m kinda pissed off any OS ever struggles to remain responsive, when this relic ran smoothly on one stick of RAM that’s smaller than my CPU’s cache.
Thoroughly familiar with it; don’t care. The global menu has always been goofy because of the invisible relation to some open window. Usually a small window floating out in middle of the desktop, because Mac OS took forever to adopt any concept of “maximize.” I’m still not sure they do it right.
Does it? I never pay attention to what version work has me running but hitting the maximize button is still exclusive full screen as effectively a new desktop
If you hold down one of the modifier keys, either Options/Alt or Cmd I don’t quite remember which, and then click the maximize button it does the normal Windows style maximize.
It usually maximizes it Windows style as well. I feel like I’ve had more inconsistency in behavior from that (like it would sometimes just fill the width but not the height), but nothing I can reproduce right now.
Googling around suggests it’s a global setting. Having recently used an Xfce version that didn’t want to super+arrow, maximize-vertical is an okay tool, but outside of super-duper-widescreen, it’s not what I’d ever want by default.
Lol this is my biggest beef with MacOS: the extent to which you have to memorize a bunch of utterly non-intuitive key combinations just to do basic tasks. Like taking a screenshot, which remains an absurd nightmare.
In its basic form, Fitts’s law says that targets a user has to hit should be as big as possible.
Dear god, my biggest beef with using a smart phone is that UI designers 1) love to have tiny buttons for shit, and 2) the tappable areas for those buttons are almost never made larger than their tiny graphics, so it’s a bitch to actually tap them.
I used to be a mobile app developer, and when I wrote apps by myself I would always expand the tappable areas so they were easy to hit with fat fingers. My last job was working for a huge cable company (maybe the name rhymes with “bombast”) and whenever I expanded the tappable area of a tiny button the UI designers would pitch a fit and insist that that not be done. Management would agree with them on the grounds that expanding the tappable area would require too much time to implement - and then they’d order me to spend even more time un-implementing it.
Something that irritates me in desktop design is, there’s a clickable icon. There’s no box around it to represent a button, just the icon on a blank background. You move your mouse towards the icon. When you get close to the icon, a box appears around it. You take this to mean “this object will be interacted with when you click the mouse.” You click the mouse. Nothing is achieved. You have to move the mouse into the actual borders of the icon, it’s just that now icons get visibly excited that you might pick them.
Windows 95 legitimately had better UI than that “Material” bullshit, via relief shading conveyed through four fucking colors. The hierarchy of elements is instantly visible. Buttons even popped in and out when clicked. There’s just no excuse for how minimalism fetishists have taken over user experience.
The full screen app contained in a single window was great! I hated the Mac eat fo many windows floating around. My ADHD was so overwhelmed by all the tiny windows instead of a clear one.
First off, Apple licensed the idea from Xerox, they didn’t steal it. Second, Apple lost because they had a badly worded contract with Microsoft for implementing Word for Mac that could be construed to allow them to copy the system’s API and thus UI.
en.wikipedia.org
Hot